Even if someone replaces Putin, Ukraine is an existential threat for Russia and they will still engage in this kind of conflict over it
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Rogozin the drunken cuntster
Maybe a successor would still see it that way, but maybe not, and that's the hope.
Or even if they do still see it that way, they might still recognise a more immediate need to halt the ongoing destruction of Russia's ground forces by withdrawing them back to the pre-February 24th borders, a withdrawal they can blame on Putin's gross blunders. Then we might at least have an end to most of the fighting, barring sporadic shelling in both directions. After which, who knows what might develop from there.
I just can't see any Russian leadership accepting Ukraine leaving their sphere of influence for the EU/Nato
Putin may have made huge blunders during the war but the reasons for doing so still make geopolitical strategic sense
More cracks showing on Russian TV:
They don't, for the simple reason that there is no existential threat to Russia from NATO and the West and never has been. The only existential threat that exists is to the survival of Putin. Moreover, it's hardly geopolitically sensible to see your economy wrecked by sanctions, your international reputation dragged through the mud, your brightest and best fleeing the country, and your conventional forces suffering huge losses that will take many years to replace, if indeed they ever can be.
Amazed somebody spoke the obvious.
Where do you base this? Ukraine is no threat to Russia, existential or not. As far as I know, most ordinary Russians do not have any problem with Ukraine as a member of EU and NATO.
it may be semantics, but I think of it more as an extension then an expansion.
Let’s assume it is. Then what? In what world do you see the NATO alliance attacking Russia in an offensive war?
I'm not sure. I guess not as otherwise you wouldn't have destroyed the country like you did
Plus the principle of unanimity in decision-making often gets ignored.
I can sort of understand that but I guess it highlights how ideologically bankrupt Russia is since the collapse of Soviet communism, that they have nothing that they can offer that can appeal against a more Western facing Ukraine making their own independent choice.
Also… irony is dead here regarding regime change. Russia literally sent in units to kill Zalensky in the opening stage of the war.
Russia like everyone else know NATO isn't going to invade if for no other reason than to avoid nuclear war. Russia don't want NATO expansion because they dream of recreating the USSR and not because they think NATO will invade.
Why would Ukraine want to invade Russia? What possible motivation is there?
It is laughable. Nobody apart from Putin wants war.
Bingo
I haven't listened bit she looks like a sweetie tbf, I think you all get a pass it's fine
But you also just said yourself that you don’t think NATO would invade Russia. You’re playing both sides of the argument here.
Their massive nuclear arsenal will ensure that won’t happen again.
No, because as I've already said, no one thinks that NATO would even remotely consider invading a nuclear-armed Russia.
If Russia has the right, in your eyes, to invade Ukraine because it's on the Russian border and Russia doesn't like Ukraine's west-ward leanings, then presumably you also think that Finland has the right to invade Russia ... because it too has a border with Russia and doesn't like Russia..
feck the Monroe doctrine - I'm not here to defend some 19th century BS. There are zero excuses for Russia's actions in Ukraine.
Just as they will never accept any former Eastern Bloc countries leaving their sphere of influence?
Yes I don't think Nato countries would invade Russia because its insane. But I understand the Russian leadership taking actions against that prospect.
Nato can't say they are just a defensive alliance when they have waged offensive wars before
stop playing the got ya card
No?
So you understand the Russian high command acting on an idea that has its basis in insanity?
It isn’t a “gotcha” card. It’s a “you’re overlooking the fact that Russia is being aggressive because they wanted to be aggressive” card. Russia isn’t doing this to keep NATO away. Hell, if they conquered Ukraine, NATO would be closer with more countries on Russia’s border than before. What you’re “understanding” makes zero sense.
It's not 19th century bullshit.
The great powers will play their games. Russia is one of them
So you understand why a authoritarian dictatorship would want to destroy an alliance of democratic countries from expanding towards its borders. It’s to stop democracy from reaching Russia, not because Putin thinks NATO is going to attack Russia.
McCain described them perfectly, but not as a great power. Their strength comes from fossil fuels & their aging nuclear arsenal.
I think you are overlooking the geopolitical aspect of this conflict. you are way too emotional over it
A great power with an economy smaller than Italy’s (soon to be smaller than Belgium’s). That’s some great power.
It is good to see John Mearsheimer has joined us.
This is a good point. A democracy in Ukraine would feck Putin
I’m absolutely not. You’re inventing fantasy hypotheticals, that’s not geopolitics.
If we regress to the "great power" theory of international relations then we might as well also accept that small countries have zero agency and cannot complain when invaded or exploited.
what fantasy hypotheticals did I make?
Technically they can’t, unless larger states swoop in to defend them. The international system is an anarchic dominance hierarchy like that.
NATO invading Russia and Ukraine invading Russia…
Russia knows good and well neither of those is going to happen. Basing an “understanding” of Russia’s actions in Ukraine based on those two scenarios is basing your understanding on fantasy.
What makes this essential difference then? Russia didn't leave those other countries alone out of goodness of their heart, but because costs of keeping that empire were much bigger than advantages coming from that and capabilities that Russia had at that point. It is an entirely plausible scenario that this too will happen with Ukraine.
as if nato didn't bomb the feck out of Serbia and Libya
I was making the point they can be an offensive power
And once again, neither of those have the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.
Interesting though that you keep bringing up Serbia, considering what brought about them getting bombed by NATO.
The Libya intervention was to enforce a UN Security Council Resolution which Russia could have vetoed but didn't. Everyone knew what its passing meant at the time.